Kerrydale Meltdown -Europa League Edition

Just had a wee snoop on Kerryfail Street.

They’ve actually started a full new thread entitled “Luck”, which is dedicated to talking about how lucky we are and how unlucky they are :)) :))

The club that get every decision going from officials, that score an abundance of deflected and last minute goals and that have had a decade of unchallenged dominance due to us being out of the picture are apparently unlucky:))

It must be torturous going through life so blinded due to the chip on your shoulder.
 
Just had a wee snoop on Kerryfail Street.

They’ve actually started a full new thread entitled “Luck”, which is dedicated to talking about how lucky we are and how unlucky they are :)) :))

The club that get every decision going from officials, that score an abundance of deflected and last minute goals and that have had a decade of unchallenged dominance due to us being out of the picture are apparently unlucky:))

It must be torturous going through life so blinded due to the chip on your shoulder.

The core beauty of this is, when it finally all comes crashing down, I mean '55' it is going to send them through the floor.
It is going to be epic.
 
Couple of comments from the paedoboard...

" got to say from what I`ve seen so far.....Duffy is an utter donkey. he`s worse then Jack Hendry."

" Shane Duff "


He's not the most popular player, is he?
O6MBWEV.gif
 
Just had a wee snoop on Kerryfail Street.

They’ve actually started a full new thread entitled “Luck”, which is dedicated to talking about how lucky we are and how unlucky they are :)) :))

The club that get every decision going from officials, that score an abundance of deflected and last minute goals and that have had a decade of unchallenged dominance due to us being out of the picture are apparently unlucky:))

It must be torturous going through life so blinded due to the chip on your shoulder.

The more you practice the luckier you get.

Gary Player.
 
Was this site not supposed to be actual posts from their forums?

These two seem a bit far fetched. :)
Some of them are desperate for attention and purposely try to "bait" kerryfail into reposting their nonsense.

I would say the guy switching teams to us is at it, but the made-up Lennon rumour is peak Celtic fan.
 
Some of them are desperate for attention and purposely try to "bait" kerryfail into reposting their nonsense.

I would say the guy switching teams to us is at it, but the made-up Lennon rumour is peak Celtic fan.

How do we know it is made up. I think he looks as if he has been out on the piss everytime you see him.

Genuinely
 
glorious :D

Something that we and every other club in the country should be all over in truth. I'm not just saying this because they're having a purple patch, but they're cheating. There is no way they are within FFP limits and it needs calling out.

When the old club did it we all stood by lamely and let them get away with it and it cost us a few titles and a lot of European money. Our board are being negligent again if they let this continue without asking questions. I honestly believe that they would happily stop us winning the 10 even if it means they go bust. They know that they will get favour from the authorities like the old club did. A few years in the lower leagues to stop us would be worth it to them and we need to make sure it doesn't happen. I can accept losing fairly but surely there is not a single Celtic fan who wants this to happen again.
 
I dare someone on here to try and work this one out :D

Whilst I don’t think luck is the reason we put in such a poor display on Saturday- anyone watching the game could tell you that Celtic deserved to get beat- I do think short-term poor luck played its part in ensuring we had a makeshift team in place for Saturday.

Luck is present in every game, e.g. a shot ball ricocheting into the path of an attacker instead of going out for a goal kick. And when considering injuries, or covid-19 related issues, a team can be unlucky over the course a number of weeks/months. In the long-run, luck should even out, e.g. a perfectly weighted coin tossed thousands of times, there will be cases where there are long runs of heads but, in the end, there should be roughly as many heads as tails.

However, luck in football is perhaps more prevalent than other sports due to the low scoring levels, and this was one the reasons football analytics began to consider expected goals (xG) alongside real goals. The aim of this move was to remove short-term luck from the data to help analyse the underlying performance of a team (although simpler models do this whilst ignoring the quality of the player shooting, which may bias the result more than luck itself).

The effect of short-term luck can therefore take longer to even out as it’s easier for a team to outscore the expected goals for a length of time or underscore expected goals if their best goal scorer missing from the team (i.e. like Saturday).

Unfortunately, the time taken for luck to even itself out exceeds the length of a season. To show this look at last year, Celtic were the better team and won the league by 0.36 points/game (13-14 points over the course of a normal season).

Taking the top two teams records we have the following win/lose/draw percentages:



Let’s assume that we know those figures above are the chance of a I prefer men in every game played over a 38-game season (simple assumption, but this is to illustrate point). If we then play out the season randomly 10,000 times for each team, we see the following pattern:



There is a wide-range of outcomes possible over the course of 10,000 simulations of the same 38-game season using last year’s figures. To illustrate this here are some numbers surrounding the above distribution:


Over the 10,000 Celtic season simulations, the minimum points we’d have ended with was 76, whereas the maximum was full points (although this was less than 0.3% of the time)! For Rangers this was 59 and 110 (one such case in 10,000).

More helpfully, the bottom/top rows on the table show the bottom/top 5% of the simulations. For example, the above table states that Celtic got less than 92 points in less than 5% of the simulations and more than 109 points in less than 5% of the simulations. For Rangers, the gap between bottom and top 5% is far wider, which helps to illustrate what ‘luck’ can do.

Finally, even if we know that Celtic are the better team (i.e. assuming the I prefer men record above is true), there will be occasions when Rangers win a 38-game season through luck. Intuitively this is true as well, when thinking back to 02-03 and 04-05.

If we pair each of the 10,000 simulations from Celtic with one from Rangers, and compare the points, then, excluding ties, we see the following win rates:


This means that even though Rangers were the worse team (their I prefer men rate is inferior), they won the league in 5.7% of the 38-game seasons.

The main point is that luck is an inherent component of a short 38-game season. Whilst luck should even itself out over the long-term, over the short-to-medium-term this can play a massive factor.
 
I dare someone on here to try and work this one out :D

Whilst I don’t think luck is the reason we put in such a poor display on Saturday- anyone watching the game could tell you that Celtic deserved to get beat- I do think short-term poor luck played its part in ensuring we had a makeshift team in place for Saturday.

Luck is present in every game, e.g. a shot ball ricocheting into the path of an attacker instead of going out for a goal kick. And when considering injuries, or covid-19 related issues, a team can be unlucky over the course a number of weeks/months. In the long-run, luck should even out, e.g. a perfectly weighted coin tossed thousands of times, there will be cases where there are long runs of heads but, in the end, there should be roughly as many heads as tails.

However, luck in football is perhaps more prevalent than other sports due to the low scoring levels, and this was one the reasons football analytics began to consider expected goals (xG) alongside real goals. The aim of this move was to remove short-term luck from the data to help analyse the underlying performance of a team (although simpler models do this whilst ignoring the quality of the player shooting, which may bias the result more than luck itself).

The effect of short-term luck can therefore take longer to even out as it’s easier for a team to outscore the expected goals for a length of time or underscore expected goals if their best goal scorer missing from the team (i.e. like Saturday).

Unfortunately, the time taken for luck to even itself out exceeds the length of a season. To show this look at last year, Celtic were the better team and won the league by 0.36 points/game (13-14 points over the course of a normal season).

Taking the top two teams records we have the following win/lose/draw percentages:



Let’s assume that we know those figures above are the chance of a I prefer men in every game played over a 38-game season (simple assumption, but this is to illustrate point). If we then play out the season randomly 10,000 times for each team, we see the following pattern:



There is a wide-range of outcomes possible over the course of 10,000 simulations of the same 38-game season using last year’s figures. To illustrate this here are some numbers surrounding the above distribution:


Over the 10,000 Celtic season simulations, the minimum points we’d have ended with was 76, whereas the maximum was full points (although this was less than 0.3% of the time)! For Rangers this was 59 and 110 (one such case in 10,000).

More helpfully, the bottom/top rows on the table show the bottom/top 5% of the simulations. For example, the above table states that Celtic got less than 92 points in less than 5% of the simulations and more than 109 points in less than 5% of the simulations. For Rangers, the gap between bottom and top 5% is far wider, which helps to illustrate what ‘luck’ can do.

Finally, even if we know that Celtic are the better team (i.e. assuming the I prefer men record above is true), there will be occasions when Rangers win a 38-game season through luck. Intuitively this is true as well, when thinking back to 02-03 and 04-05.

If we pair each of the 10,000 simulations from Celtic with one from Rangers, and compare the points, then, excluding ties, we see the following win rates:


This means that even though Rangers were the worse team (their I prefer men rate is inferior), they won the league in 5.7% of the 38-game seasons.

The main point is that luck is an inherent component of a short 38-game season. Whilst luck should even itself out over the long-term, over the short-to-medium-term this can play a massive factor.

Made me laugh
 
I dare someone on here to try and work this one out :D

Whilst I don’t think luck is the reason we put in such a poor display on Saturday- anyone watching the game could tell you that Celtic deserved to get beat- I do think short-term poor luck played its part in ensuring we had a makeshift team in place for Saturday.

Luck is present in every game, e.g. a shot ball ricocheting into the path of an attacker instead of going out for a goal kick. And when considering injuries, or covid-19 related issues, a team can be unlucky over the course a number of weeks/months. In the long-run, luck should even out, e.g. a perfectly weighted coin tossed thousands of times, there will be cases where there are long runs of heads but, in the end, there should be roughly as many heads as tails.

However, luck in football is perhaps more prevalent than other sports due to the low scoring levels, and this was one the reasons football analytics began to consider expected goals (xG) alongside real goals. The aim of this move was to remove short-term luck from the data to help analyse the underlying performance of a team (although simpler models do this whilst ignoring the quality of the player shooting, which may bias the result more than luck itself).

The effect of short-term luck can therefore take longer to even out as it’s easier for a team to outscore the expected goals for a length of time or underscore expected goals if their best goal scorer missing from the team (i.e. like Saturday).

Unfortunately, the time taken for luck to even itself out exceeds the length of a season. To show this look at last year, Celtic were the better team and won the league by 0.36 points/game (13-14 points over the course of a normal season).

Taking the top two teams records we have the following win/lose/draw percentages:



Let’s assume that we know those figures above are the chance of a I prefer men in every game played over a 38-game season (simple assumption, but this is to illustrate point). If we then play out the season randomly 10,000 times for each team, we see the following pattern:



There is a wide-range of outcomes possible over the course of 10,000 simulations of the same 38-game season using last year’s figures. To illustrate this here are some numbers surrounding the above distribution:


Over the 10,000 Celtic season simulations, the minimum points we’d have ended with was 76, whereas the maximum was full points (although this was less than 0.3% of the time)! For Rangers this was 59 and 110 (one such case in 10,000).

More helpfully, the bottom/top rows on the table show the bottom/top 5% of the simulations. For example, the above table states that Celtic got less than 92 points in less than 5% of the simulations and more than 109 points in less than 5% of the simulations. For Rangers, the gap between bottom and top 5% is far wider, which helps to illustrate what ‘luck’ can do.

Finally, even if we know that Celtic are the better team (i.e. assuming the I prefer men record above is true), there will be occasions when Rangers win a 38-game season through luck. Intuitively this is true as well, when thinking back to 02-03 and 04-05.

If we pair each of the 10,000 simulations from Celtic with one from Rangers, and compare the points, then, excluding ties, we see the following win rates:


This means that even though Rangers were the worse team (their I prefer men rate is inferior), they won the league in 5.7% of the 38-game seasons.

The main point is that luck is an inherent component of a short 38-game season. Whilst luck should even itself out over the long-term, over the short-to-medium-term this can play a massive factor.

This is tremendous. Can you imagine being that guy.
 
I dare someone on here to try and work this one out :D

Whilst I don’t think luck is the reason we put in such a poor display on Saturday- anyone watching the game could tell you that Celtic deserved to get beat- I do think short-term poor luck played its part in ensuring we had a makeshift team in place for Saturday.

Luck is present in every game, e.g. a shot ball ricocheting into the path of an attacker instead of going out for a goal kick. And when considering injuries, or covid-19 related issues, a team can be unlucky over the course a number of weeks/months. In the long-run, luck should even out, e.g. a perfectly weighted coin tossed thousands of times, there will be cases where there are long runs of heads but, in the end, there should be roughly as many heads as tails.

However, luck in football is perhaps more prevalent than other sports due to the low scoring levels, and this was one the reasons football analytics began to consider expected goals (xG) alongside real goals. The aim of this move was to remove short-term luck from the data to help analyse the underlying performance of a team (although simpler models do this whilst ignoring the quality of the player shooting, which may bias the result more than luck itself).

The effect of short-term luck can therefore take longer to even out as it’s easier for a team to outscore the expected goals for a length of time or underscore expected goals if their best goal scorer missing from the team (i.e. like Saturday).

Unfortunately, the time taken for luck to even itself out exceeds the length of a season. To show this look at last year, Celtic were the better team and won the league by 0.36 points/game (13-14 points over the course of a normal season).

Taking the top two teams records we have the following win/lose/draw percentages:



Let’s assume that we know those figures above are the chance of a I prefer men in every game played over a 38-game season (simple assumption, but this is to illustrate point). If we then play out the season randomly 10,000 times for each team, we see the following pattern:



There is a wide-range of outcomes possible over the course of 10,000 simulations of the same 38-game season using last year’s figures. To illustrate this here are some numbers surrounding the above distribution:


Over the 10,000 Celtic season simulations, the minimum points we’d have ended with was 76, whereas the maximum was full points (although this was less than 0.3% of the time)! For Rangers this was 59 and 110 (one such case in 10,000).

More helpfully, the bottom/top rows on the table show the bottom/top 5% of the simulations. For example, the above table states that Celtic got less than 92 points in less than 5% of the simulations and more than 109 points in less than 5% of the simulations. For Rangers, the gap between bottom and top 5% is far wider, which helps to illustrate what ‘luck’ can do.

Finally, even if we know that Celtic are the better team (i.e. assuming the I prefer men record above is true), there will be occasions when Rangers win a 38-game season through luck. Intuitively this is true as well, when thinking back to 02-03 and 04-05.

If we pair each of the 10,000 simulations from Celtic with one from Rangers, and compare the points, then, excluding ties, we see the following win rates:


This means that even though Rangers were the worse team (their I prefer men rate is inferior), they won the league in 5.7% of the 38-game seasons.

The main point is that luck is an inherent component of a short 38-game season. Whilst luck should even itself out over the long-term, over the short-to-medium-term this can play a massive factor.
 
I dare someone on here to try and work this one out :D

Whilst I don’t think luck is the reason we put in such a poor display on Saturday- anyone watching the game could tell you that Celtic deserved to get beat- I do think short-term poor luck played its part in ensuring we had a makeshift team in place for Saturday.

Luck is present in every game, e.g. a shot ball ricocheting into the path of an attacker instead of going out for a goal kick. And when considering injuries, or covid-19 related issues, a team can be unlucky over the course a number of weeks/months. In the long-run, luck should even out, e.g. a perfectly weighted coin tossed thousands of times, there will be cases where there are long runs of heads but, in the end, there should be roughly as many heads as tails.

However, luck in football is perhaps more prevalent than other sports due to the low scoring levels, and this was one the reasons football analytics began to consider expected goals (xG) alongside real goals. The aim of this move was to remove short-term luck from the data to help analyse the underlying performance of a team (although simpler models do this whilst ignoring the quality of the player shooting, which may bias the result more than luck itself).

The effect of short-term luck can therefore take longer to even out as it’s easier for a team to outscore the expected goals for a length of time or underscore expected goals if their best goal scorer missing from the team (i.e. like Saturday).

Unfortunately, the time taken for luck to even itself out exceeds the length of a season. To show this look at last year, Celtic were the better team and won the league by 0.36 points/game (13-14 points over the course of a normal season).

Taking the top two teams records we have the following win/lose/draw percentages:



Let’s assume that we know those figures above are the chance of a I prefer men in every game played over a 38-game season (simple assumption, but this is to illustrate point). If we then play out the season randomly 10,000 times for each team, we see the following pattern:



There is a wide-range of outcomes possible over the course of 10,000 simulations of the same 38-game season using last year’s figures. To illustrate this here are some numbers surrounding the above distribution:


Over the 10,000 Celtic season simulations, the minimum points we’d have ended with was 76, whereas the maximum was full points (although this was less than 0.3% of the time)! For Rangers this was 59 and 110 (one such case in 10,000).

More helpfully, the bottom/top rows on the table show the bottom/top 5% of the simulations. For example, the above table states that Celtic got less than 92 points in less than 5% of the simulations and more than 109 points in less than 5% of the simulations. For Rangers, the gap between bottom and top 5% is far wider, which helps to illustrate what ‘luck’ can do.

Finally, even if we know that Celtic are the better team (i.e. assuming the I prefer men record above is true), there will be occasions when Rangers win a 38-game season through luck. Intuitively this is true as well, when thinking back to 02-03 and 04-05.

If we pair each of the 10,000 simulations from Celtic with one from Rangers, and compare the points, then, excluding ties, we see the following win rates:


This means that even though Rangers were the worse team (their I prefer men rate is inferior), they won the league in 5.7% of the 38-game seasons.

The main point is that luck is an inherent component of a short 38-game season. Whilst luck should even itself out over the long-term, over the short-to-medium-term this can play a massive factor.

Why does that have the 'I prefer men' filter on? I thought that was just this forum?
 
glorious :D

Something that we and every other club in the country should be all over in truth. I'm not just saying this because they're having a purple patch, but they're cheating. There is no way they are within FFP limits and it needs calling out.

When the old club did it we all stood by lamely and let them get away with it and it cost us a few titles and a lot of European money. Our board are being negligent again if they let this continue without asking questions. I honestly believe that they would happily stop us winning the 10 even if it means they go bust. They know that they will get favour from the authorities like the old club did. A few years in the lower leagues to stop us would be worth it to them and we need to make sure it doesn't happen. I can accept losing fairly but surely there is not a single Celtic fan who wants this to happen again.
Feel the burn ya smelly tramps.
 
I dare someone on here to try and work this one out :D

Whilst I don’t think luck is the reason we put in such a poor display on Saturday- anyone watching the game could tell you that Celtic deserved to get beat- I do think short-term poor luck played its part in ensuring we had a makeshift team in place for Saturday.

Luck is present in every game, e.g. a shot ball ricocheting into the path of an attacker instead of going out for a goal kick. And when considering injuries, or covid-19 related issues, a team can be unlucky over the course a number of weeks/months. In the long-run, luck should even out, e.g. a perfectly weighted coin tossed thousands of times, there will be cases where there are long runs of heads but, in the end, there should be roughly as many heads as tails.

However, luck in football is perhaps more prevalent than other sports due to the low scoring levels, and this was one the reasons football analytics began to consider expected goals (xG) alongside real goals. The aim of this move was to remove short-term luck from the data to help analyse the underlying performance of a team (although simpler models do this whilst ignoring the quality of the player shooting, which may bias the result more than luck itself).

The effect of short-term luck can therefore take longer to even out as it’s easier for a team to outscore the expected goals for a length of time or underscore expected goals if their best goal scorer missing from the team (i.e. like Saturday).

Unfortunately, the time taken for luck to even itself out exceeds the length of a season. To show this look at last year, Celtic were the better team and won the league by 0.36 points/game (13-14 points over the course of a normal season).

Taking the top two teams records we have the following win/lose/draw percentages:



Let’s assume that we know those figures above are the chance of a I prefer men in every game played over a 38-game season (simple assumption, but this is to illustrate point). If we then play out the season randomly 10,000 times for each team, we see the following pattern:



There is a wide-range of outcomes possible over the course of 10,000 simulations of the same 38-game season using last year’s figures. To illustrate this here are some numbers surrounding the above distribution:


Over the 10,000 Celtic season simulations, the minimum points we’d have ended with was 76, whereas the maximum was full points (although this was less than 0.3% of the time)! For Rangers this was 59 and 110 (one such case in 10,000).

More helpfully, the bottom/top rows on the table show the bottom/top 5% of the simulations. For example, the above table states that Celtic got less than 92 points in less than 5% of the simulations and more than 109 points in less than 5% of the simulations. For Rangers, the gap between bottom and top 5% is far wider, which helps to illustrate what ‘luck’ can do.

Finally, even if we know that Celtic are the better team (i.e. assuming the I prefer men record above is true), there will be occasions when Rangers win a 38-game season through luck. Intuitively this is true as well, when thinking back to 02-03 and 04-05.

If we pair each of the 10,000 simulations from Celtic with one from Rangers, and compare the points, then, excluding ties, we see the following win rates:


This means that even though Rangers were the worse team (their I prefer men rate is inferior), they won the league in 5.7% of the 38-game seasons.

The main point is that luck is an inherent component of a short 38-game season. Whilst luck should even itself out over the long-term, over the short-to-medium-term this can play a massive factor.
 
I got sent this catalogue this morning. Looks like full meltdown underway. Even if its just bunkum, it rings joyously true.
"Story doin the Rounds

Big problems at Lennoxtown on Monday according to someone close to the squad.

Lennon went through the team one by one, but Brown wasn’t having any of it. Said the players have had enough of Lennon’s lack of professionalism. Apparently he’s been turning up to training stinking of booze. Lennon went mental and had to be held back by Big Duffy.

French contingent have chucked it, say they won’t play for Lennon anymore.

Lawwell is working his ticket for a move to Man Utd to replace Ed Woodward, so he’s checked out.

Absolute shambles on and off the park. The 10 is in real danger
THIS IS DOING THE ROUNDS

Kennedy fell out with Lennon on Friday at training.

Duffy made to play after getting an abscess removed from his mouth along with 2 teeth - said he didn’t feel ready to play and Jullien fit enough but manager did not want him to play after fallout at training.

So basically the manager is doing what he did at Hibs.

Falling out with players

Attending training drunk

Having zero tactics

Sitting in dugout spitting out skol bandits onto pitch

He’s so far up his own arse its time for him and the guy that brought him to leave with immediate effect.

Eddy does not want to play for Lennon and thinks he’s a bully."

:))
 
Back
Top